[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-16048?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17496431#comment-17496431
]
Kevin Risden edited comment on SOLR-16048 at 2/23/22, 2:10 AM:
---------------------------------------------------------------
This is implemented here:
*
https://github.com/apache/solr/blame/main/dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py#L114
*
https://github.com/apache/solr/blame/main/dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py#L194
was (Author: risdenk):
This is implemented here:
https://github.com/apache/solr/blame/main/dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py#L114
> Examine Tika dependencies that brought in javax classes
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-16048
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-16048
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Task
> Security Level: Public(Default Security Level. Issues are Public)
> Components: contrib - Solr Cell (Tika extraction)
> Reporter: Kevin Risden
> Priority: Major
>
> SOLR-15989 Tika 1.28.1 upgrade brought in some javax packaged classes which
> [~janhoy] caught with the smoketester. Details from [~janhoy] in SOLR-15989:
> {quote}This upgrade adds many parsers and dependencies. I ran the
> smoketester, which introspects every jar looking for illegal "java.{*}" and
> "javax.{*}" class files. These libararies were flagged by the smoke tester:
> {code:java}
> modules/extraction/lib/unit-api-1.0.jar" contains sheisty class
> "javax/measure/Dimension.class"
> modules/extraction/lib/jakarta.activation-1.2.2.jar" contains sheisty class
> "javax/activation/CommandInfo$Beans$1.class"
> modules/extraction/lib/jakarta.annotation-api-1.3.5.jar" contains sheisty
> class "javax/annotation/security/PermitAll.class"
> jakarta.xml.bind-api:2.3.3 {code}
> I believes all jakarta libs are OK license wise, but strangely they use the
> javax.xxx namespace instead of jakarta.xxx. The Units API (javax.measure.xxx)
> seems to be in the same category, that it is a JSR implemented with an
> allowed license.
> We have excluded several annotation jars elsewhere, that's why I raise this
> here.
> I assume the correct action is to make exceptions for these pacakges in the
> smoke tester. Any other insight?{quote}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.1#820001)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
